USA Politics

Flaming Blimp Crash said:
And here I thought the portrait thing was going to be the dumbest thing out of the White House today. It's actually a pretty good portrait that hides how old he looks now.
Click to expand...
Yes but the picture shown in the article - which doesn't make him look like an arrogant, conceited twat (quite an achievement in itself) - is the one he hates. Us plebs haven't been allowed to see the new one yet but it would appear that Putin has not been slow to work out an effective way to flatter Trump's vanity. Why am I not surprised? ::)
 
Putting my tin foil hat on, this was no accident that it was leaked, either as a fuck you to Europe, or else they'll start having a go at journalists being traitors for publishing it.
 
5xbr3f.jpg
 
Vaenyr said:
Kinda ironic that the crowd that spent years whining about Hillary's emails will be suspiciously silent about the Trump admin discussing war plans in a group chat and adding random people to it by accident.
Click to expand...
Oh, totally. Hillary (or, indeed, any of Trump's opponents) did it: therefore it must be utterly reprehensible. Trump did it: therefore it must be totally okay and above board. It's called "confirmation bias"...:confused:
 
Black Abyss Babe said:
It's called "confirmation bias"...:confused:
Click to expand...

This goes way beyond confirmation bias. As I understand it, confirmation bias means you tend to accept information that supports (or confirms) what you already think. What we are observing here is more in "doublethink" territory. Trump denies doing something, then he says he did it but it's okay, and his supporters accept both statements as truth. Simultaneously.

Sorry if I'm tiring you all with the "1984" references but they are too tempting nowadays.
 
As I saw in another chat,

The important word in the phrase "her emails" was "her".

Everyone on this group chat should be fired, and would be, in a normal administration. It's an incredible misuse of national security to have it on their phones, which are never as secure as people think they are. Each of these people has access to a SCIF in their homes, and the appropriate infrastructure on which to use it. Every time they open a Signal chat to talk about operational matters, they put lives at risk - even if they don't accidentally add the wrong person. They're playing chicken with the lives of American servicepeople and intelligence agents. They're all incompetent buffoons.

If you're MAGA and you aren't angry about this, I guess you also don't care if American soldiers are at risk, or if intelligence agents get killed. Way to betray America.
 
LooseCannon said:
If you're MAGA and you aren't angry about this, I guess you also don't care if American soldiers are at risk, or if intelligence agents get killed. Way to betray America.
Click to expand...
As if MAGA care about the military. Their Dear Leader thinks soldiers are losers (actual quote).
 
Dr. Eddies Wingman said:
This goes way beyond confirmation bias. As I understand it, confirmation bias means you tend to accept information that supports (or confirms) what you already think. What we are observing here is more in "doublethink" territory. Trump denies doing something, then he says he did it but it's okay, and his supporters accept both statements as truth. Simultaneously.

Sorry if I'm tiring you all with the "1984" references but they are too tempting nowadays.
Click to expand...
Yes I agree but in this scenario "doublethink" and "confirmation bias" are not mutually exclusive because MAGA-morons seem to only believe two things: 1. Trump can do no wrong and 2. anyone who crosses Trump can't possibly ever have done anything right. So they will reject any evidence that Hillary didn't screw up, and they will reject all the evidence that Trump has (repeatedly). They don't see the contradictions because, in their bubble, any inconvenient evidence is derided as "fake news".

I've never read "1984", but I've often thought that I probably should. Maybe now is the time ...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jer
Onhell said:
It pairs well with Brave New World and The Handmaid's Tale
Click to expand...
Also Zamyatin's We, which was an inspiration for both BNW and 1984 (the latter being a lot more blatant about taking inspiration than the former). Excellent book and severely underrated compared to the other ones mentioned here (which are also great).
 
Vaenyr said:
Also Zamyatin's We, which was an inspiration for both BNW and 1984 (the latter being a lot more blatant about taking inspiration than the former). Excellent book and severely underrated compared to the other ones mentioned here (which are also great).
Click to expand...
The Boyfriend is absolutely adamant that BNW and 1984 must be read together: "decide for yourself which is the bleaker vision" was his assessment.

I've never heard of "We", though ... :S
 
Black Abyss Babe said:
The Boyfriend is absolutely adamant that BNW and 1984 must be read together: "decide for yourself which is the bleaker vision" was his assessment.

I've never heard of "We", though ... :S
Click to expand...
One could argue that BNW isn't bleak, depending on the caste obviously. It presents its civilized world as a utopia where things like sickness are a thing of the past. I can imagine people reading the book and seeing the portrayal as a positive. You have to think a bit about the Savage's motivation and about the pursuit of individual interests and interpretations of art (for example) to see that the sanitized and overly organized way of life that are we are presented with might be lacking pain but it also lacks any real depth. It is superficial and thus not satisfying in the long run.
 
Its probably endorsed by the old whinger crowd. Back in my day I didn't watch TikTok I was out in the snow at 5am on my bike delivering newspapers. How all 14 year olds should be. None of this namby pamby college stuff and wanting to work in offices when you grow up rubbish, proper real jobs and getting your hands dirty, you work your way up to being rich that way.
 
Vaenyr said:
One could argue that BNW isn't bleak, depending on the caste obviously. It presents its civilized world as a utopia where things like sickness are a thing of the past. I can imagine people reading the book and seeing the portrayal as a positive. You have to think a bit about the Savage's motivation and about the pursuit of individual interests and interpretations of art (for example) to see that the sanitized and overly organized way of life that are we are presented with might be lacking pain but it also lacks any real depth. It is superficial and thus not satisfying in the long run.
Click to expand...
Exactly - he said that one of them is obviously distopian from the start, the other has the initial impression of utopia with the disturbing details only emerging along the way. He didn't say which was which though, and for some reason I assumed it would be the other way around :confused:
 
How stupid is she? Or how stupid does she think we are?

Everyone knows that this thing is real now - if only because of how many of the people involved (including Trump) immediately went on the defensive - yet only now that this particular horse has bolted do they try to shut the stable door by introducing the word "hoax".

Yup, we're well and truly into doublethink territory now - I wonder, does one of Musk's companies have a line of electric monks in an advanced stage of development?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top